Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on European Community Water Policy'
Date: 1996-09-25
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU policy, environmental protection, sustainable development, water management, water resources













EUR-Lex - 51996AC1069 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51996AC1069

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on European Community Water Policy'  


Official Journal C 030 , 30/01/1997 P. 0005 





Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on European Community Water Policy` (97/C 30/02) On 5 March 1996, the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on European Community Water Policy`.The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 16 July 1996. The rapporteur was Mrs Sánchez Miguel.At its 338th Plenary Session (meeting of 25 September 1996), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following Opinion with 97 votes in favour and two abstentions.1. Introduction1.1. The Communication is pursuant to the Commission's 5th environmental action programme, and responds to the call for a thorough review of Community water policy. It focuses on the basic issue of water-resource protection, and does not deal in depth with other broader issues.1.2. This review of Community policy seeks to arrive at a sustainable water policy which meets the following objectives, although it considers that they will not always be compatible:- provide a secure supply of drinking water;- ensure water resources of sufficient quality and quantity to meet economic requirements;- guarantee the good ecological state and functioning of aquatic, wetland and terrestrial ecosystems;- prevent floods and droughts.The Communication concludes that a framework Directive is needed to round off and update existing legislation.1.3. The Committee has already requested a more coherent Community water policy, for instance in its Opinion () on the revision of the drinking water Directive ().The Committee thus warmly welcomes the proposal to draw up a framework Directive on protection of the quantity and quality of EU water resources.2. Quantity of water resources2.1. One aspect which the Communication does not consider sufficiently is the definition of water as a renewable and limited natural resource which may become scarce as a result of the particular weather conditions in some regions of the EU. This problem is at present especially evident in the Mediterranean countries. Further study is urgently needed of the likely impact on the water cycle of current climate changes throughout the EU.2.2. The close link between water quantity and quality (dilution of pollution, ecological value, determination of minimum emission levels) means that a sustainable water policy should also consider the quantity of water resources.2.3. The way to ensure adequate water resources (i.e. a sufficient quantity to meet human needs and those of natural ecosystems) does not lie in supply policies which constantly seek out new sources which are often very costly and have an enormous social, economic and environmental impact. It lies in demand policies designed to adapt the different water uses to the existing finite resources.2.4. The Community needs to develop a new approach to water use, re-use and saving which, while taking due account of particular regional conditions, encompasses protection of the quality and quantity of existing resources by means of better conservation policies, sensible water charges and better education of customers. This new approach is crucial for using water in a sustainable manner which ensures that the water policy objectives listed in point 1.2 will always be compatible.2.5. The Committee considers that it would be helpful to establish priorities among the objectives set out in the Communication. Greater priority should be given to environmental requirements, as these are vital for safeguarding drinking-water supplies and preventing droughts and floods, and for sustainable economic development of industry, agriculture and services.The order of priorities here would be:- supplies for human consumption;- guarantee of ecological requirements;- agricultural and industrial use;- leisure and other non-essential uses.3. Factors affecting achievement of water policy objectives3.1. The Committee endorses the list and classification of factors affecting the achievement of sustainable water policy objectives.3.2. However, the Communication's (necessarily brief) analysis of what it terms 'other adverse anthropogenic influences` needs to be fleshed out. More consideration is needed of the sustainable management and protection of water resources, with reference to the types of infrastructure that may be used, their possible impact on the environment, and other policies with a bearing on water management (prevention of erosion, reafforestation, etc.).4. Basic principles of water policy in the EU4.1. The general framework of Community policy is provided by Article 130r of the Treaty, which sets out the basic principles of environment policy. Of these, the Committee lays particular stress on the 'Polluter pays` principle.4.2. The Committee considers that the authorities should carry out rigorous studies, using the available scientific and technical data in accordance with the precautionary principle, in order to provide reliable forecasts of such socio-economic variables as future water consumption in economic activities and foreseeable authorized industrial and agricultural use of hazardous substances. This is necessary because such activities may lead to intervention with a high cost in infrastructure, plant and treatment which may not correspond with actual needs and may adversely affect their effectiveness and profitability.4.3. The Treaty stipulates that when deciding the specific objectives of environmental policy, account must be taken of the costs and benefits of action or lack of action, with a view to securing the best solution as regards the different strategic options.However, it is obvious - and should therefore be considered both in the Communication and in any subsequent Directive - that although appraising the monetary value of natural resources is one of the objectives of sustainable development, these resources cannot be treated exclusively as items of merchandise, for various reasons:a) the vital importance of a resource such as water for the survival of human life and of ecosystems - the value of this precious asset cannot be quantified in economic terms;b) the difficulty of assessing the economic impact of other factors related to water resources: the costs of erosion or desertification, of preserving the landscape value of water and the genetic diversity of polluted or over-exploited ecosystems;c) water production, distribution and consumption prices have in part been set without taking account of the related environmental effects, so these prices do not reflect the real cost to society.To ensure that cost-benefit analysis of water-related legislation is effective, priorities must be established and cost-effective and affordable programmes must be developed in order to prevent the cumulative effects of different EU policies being passed on to the customers' bills.4.4. In the light of the above considerations, the Committee considers that:- water resources cannot be treated as just another tradeable good, as they have special characteristics: they are vital for human life, for the survival of all ecosystems, and for essential production activities. Hence society at large, and the social partners in particular, should be widely involved in their protection and management;- water policy must never be used as a political tool for discriminating against other communities;- the Community should ensure that both EU legislation and environmental/economic policy instruments are not used to distort competition, given the unequal natural distribution of water resources.5. Proposal for a framework Directive on water resources5.1. The Commission considers that present Community legislation is outdated, and that it can be made more consistent and effective through the adoption of a framework Directive on water resources that covers:- water quantity and quality;- management of surface water and groundwater;- water use and environmental protection;- control of pollution through emission and discharge controls and the setting of quality objectives;- integration of water policy with other policies.5.2. The Committee supports the framework Directive and thinks that it would be more effective if it gave more consideration to two points:5.2.1. Firstly, more consideration is needed of water policy in agriculture, as this is an extremely important aspect. Research should be promoted into more efficient irrigation techniques, new fertilizers and pesticides that do not harm the environment, and systems for reusing waste water. Farming techniques that use fewer agro-chemicals to achieve the same result should also be encouraged.5.2.2. Secondly, consideration is needed of the aspects of groundwater and coastal waters management which are of relevance to the new policy.5.3. The framework Directive would be implemented by means of integrated water management planning on a river-basin basis.The Committee thinks that the proposed planning offers a suitable means of managing water resources in a sustainable manner, and of developing and protecting terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.5.4. However, the Committee considers that:- when considering river-basin management issues that involve third countries, account must be taken of the international agreements concluded with these countries. Where such agreements do not exist, the Commission should adopt appropriate measures;- a classification is needed of the different types of river basins within the Community, so that the integrated water management plans for them can be geared to their special characteristics (climate, the ecosystems which they support, morphology, relation with production activities, soil composition and so on).To ensure that the plans are effective, the Committee thinks that the Directive should also include mechanisms for:a) involving all the socio-economic players in their preparation;b) establishing monitoring and control bodies, on which the socio-economic players should also be represented;c) establishing special total or partial funding channels for the measures contained in the plans.5.5. The Committee thinks that a 'natural ecological state` is the optimum objective. However, as was indicated in the ESC Opinion on the Ecological Quality of Water Directive (), a better wording for the moment would be 'good ecological state`, although still with a view to achieving the natural ecological state.5.6. The Committee welcomes the system of licensing as proposed by the European Commission, as water quantity and quality are integrated. The system might not be required in cases where abstraction only affects one country, as this would help to reduce red tape.6. Specific issues in water management6.1. The Communication analyses a number of specific issues in the EU's current water management policy.6.2. As regards control of point source pollution of water resources and monitoring of water quality, the Committee calls for adoption of the recommendations made at the Conference on Community water policy held by the Commission on 28-29 May 1996. Particular stress should be placed on:- the use of a combined approach that reconciles the strategy of setting emission limit values with the establishment of water quality objectives;- establishment of a common framework of definitions for both approaches;- incorporation of biological parameters when determining water quality;- fixing of EU limit values for emissions of all substances singled out in present legislation, as already advocated by the Committee in its Opinion () on the Proposal for a Directive on integrated pollution prevention and control (), in a manner consistent with the principles set out in that proposal;- establishment of a system making it possible to lay down water quality objectives at EU level where necessary;- support for scientific and technical research to determine the best available techniques (BAT) () on which to base emission limit values;- establishment of a proper information and control system to ensure comparability of the data and techniques used by the Member States;- establishment of EU regulatory measures to reduce the risk of accidental pollution caused by sectors such as industry, agriculture or transport and affecting water-supply catchment areas. This regulatory framework would require the water management authorities in each country to take mandatory actions for implementation, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle.6.3. The Communication mentions the possibility of designating zones according to the level of protection needed to sustain them. The Committee thinks that the zoning system should respect the overall protection of the basins concerned, and would have to be drawn up according to existing technical and scientific knowledge. Efforts would be needed to standardize and revise the relevant criteria and concepts, which must be used by all Member States and must be consistent with the various international conventions on protection of the aquatic environment (Helsinki, OSPAR, etc.) to which the EU is party. Assessing water quality is a complex matter, and depends to a large extent on the criteria considered.6.4. Public information is a prerequisite for involvement and monitoring by the public and the socio-economic players. The framework Directive should make specific provision for such information not only by obliging the public authorities to issue information on the state of water resources, but also by ensuring public access, according to equivalent conditions throughout the EU, to information concerning private bodies' and enterprises' compliance with their obligations under national and EU legislation on the use, production and discharge of pollutants and hazardous substances.6.5. In the interests of effective public information, the subsidiarity principle should be invoked to enable each Member State to retain or introduce appropriate instruments. The framework Directive should, however, stipulate the minimum information which must be provided, together with its periodic updating and a guarantee of permanent access to it for all interested parties.There are a number of reasons for this, additional to those mentioned by the Commission:- the vital importance of water resources for sustaining life and for most productive activities;- the frequently transfrontier nature of water resources;- to optimize information and the scientific and technical research needed for conservation and maintenance on the basis of comparable data.7. Conclusions7.1. The framework Directive would replace four existing Directives and one draft Directive, and would incorporate definitions and monitoring requirements from another seven Directives and a further draft Directive.The following Directives would be repealed and replaced by the Framework Directive:- surface water Directive () [and the related 79/869/EEC Directive ()];- fish water Directive ();- shellfish water Directive ();- groundwater Directive ();- ecological quality of water proposed Directive ().7.2. The Committee supports this move, but stresses the need to safeguard the elements of these Directives which have been used in subsequent legislation. The entry into force of the framework Directive must be synchronized with the repeal of the earlier ones so as to prevent any hiatus during which environmental protection would be weakened.The framework Directive should also allow for the subsequent development of any further Directives necessary for securing its objectives, not only those not being repealed and the proposals mentioned in chapter 10 of the Communication (Procedural implications).7.3. The Committee reserves the right to issue a separate Opinion on the future framework Directive in due course.7.4. The Committee also suggests that the Commission promote specific education programmes in EU schools to help consolidate the new environmental thinking.7.5. The drafting of a European water-resource map, showing the condition of each river basin (as regards both water quantity and quality) would also be very useful.Brussels, 25 September 1996.The President of the Economic and Social CommitteeCarlos FERRER() OJ No C 82, 19. 3. 1996.() COM(94) 612 final.() OJ No C 397, 31. 12. 1994.() OJ No C 195, 18. 7. 1994.() COM(93) 423 final.() As defined in Article 2(11) of the Council's common position on the proposal concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (OJ No C 87, 25. 3. 1996).() OJ No L 194, 25. 7. 1975.() OJ No L 271, 29. 10. 1979.() OJ No L 222, 14. 8. 1978.() OJ No L 281, 10. 11. 1979.() OJ No L 20, 26. 1. 1980.() COM(93) 680 final.